4 ms·

TV, Radio, Press, Outdoors, and every other media have laws and regulations - laws and regulations set by elected officials, that go through a transparent proce

TV, Radio, Press, Outdoors, and every other media have laws and regulations - laws and regulations set by elected officials, that go through a transparent process, and for which people might disagree and vote out those elected officials. This ranges from the amount of advertising space, content, and political propaganda; everything has a set of rules and regulations. Why is it ok for you to have a billionaire do whatever he wants, including spreading disinformation and propaganda, and allow for bot networks to spread propaganda from foreign agents, without any accountability? Why should we have no rules for social media, while all the remaining media have to abide by laws and are held accountable for it? Why should a billionaire have more power than the people who voted?

retinaros 1y ago
he complies with those law and even proved it thousands of times. he even said it himself that he had to comply to country law and blocked/banned accounts french gov asked him to Do you believe that your political opponents investigating an "algorithm" to prove it is "manipulated" would not already have written the output of this investigation? Every freaking machine learning model has a bias. ask GPT or anthropic about palestine or even Trump, ask Deepseek about tiananmen. If you search for something you will find it. I could take GPT and prove its "manipulated" toward any race I want. Ill just start from this affirmation and then find things good enough to prove it to random people that will read the billionaire backed press that you praise
- libertine 1y ago
  I'm not sure what you're trying to imply. Didn't the Twitter algorithm change in July 2024 after Elon endorsed Trump, to increase his reach and the reach of other individuals?[0] > Every freaking machine learning model has a bias. You're saying this like there's no human decision behind it. As if it's an act of nature and "oh well that's how it turned out to be!", without any concern for legality, revenue, growth, user engagement, nothing matters, it's just "the algorithm doing its thing". Every social media algorithm is tailored, and people continually modify them. Heck, Google even named their algorithm updates for search! But let's entertain that idea of lack of agency - just because they don't have agency over the algorithm (which they do), they can still shut it down. If they can't control whether an algorithm promotes illegal stuff, or if it's being massively used by foreign agents' bot networks, then should they be running their own business? But hey, somehow they have it figured out for advertisers! lmao [0]https://www.theverge.com/2024/11/17/24298669/musk-trump-endorsement-x-boosting-republican-posts-july-algorithm-change https://www.theverge.com/2024/11/17/24298669/musk-trump-endo...
  - retinaros 1y ago
    per your link. couldnt you entertain the possibility that those voices were silenced by left leaning twitter policies? they even admitted it. it appears now to this same leaning press that actually there are plenty of right wing voices in USA (like the ones that voted for trump). I am not sure what is the problem. just like and follow people of the left and the algorithm will adapt.
storus 1y ago
Why should the billionaires that set the current EU social networking policy be more important than the lone billionaire that runs X? Or do you think these policies are organic and come from the EU population itself?
- libertine 1y ago
  As I said: these decisions are made by elected officials. If there's a conspiracy of corruption/lobbying/interests behind those countries' decisions, it's a completely different problem that is for those countries' regulators to control, and/or for the people to choose to vote for someone else. France isn't Russia or Iran, where you have an illegitimate regime that does whatever it wants above their law and constitution. A Conspiracy Theory doesn't give any right to the billionaire owner of the social network to be above the law.
  - storus 1y ago
    AFAIK X is owned by an American billionaire, not a Russian/Iranian one, so please don't pollute the argument with irrelevant strawmen. What we are seeing real-time is a failure/hack of representative democracy that serves only some extremely small, but well-connected minority at the levers of power that are willing to drive EU to the ground just to stay in power (see EU economic performance since 2008).
    - libertine 1y ago
      Well, you're taking what I said out of context, because it was YOU who brought the conspiracy theory stating that France/EU illegitimately serves the interests of billionaires, whereas I compared it to countries such as Russia/Iran. So don't try to spin your irrelevant bad takes on me, own up to them. > What we are seeing... What you're seeing is that a billionaire is being held accountable, and for some unknown reason, you don't like it. You don't represent the opinion of anyone but yourself.
      - storus 1y ago

retinaros 1y ago

he complies with those law and even proved it thousands of times. he even said it himself that he had to comply to country law and blocked/banned accounts french gov asked him to Do you believe that your political opponents investigating an "algorithm" to prove it is "manipulated" would not already have written the output of this investigation? Every freaking machine learning model has a bias. ask GPT or anthropic about palestine or even Trump, ask Deepseek about tiananmen. If you search for something you will find it. I could take GPT and prove its "manipulated" toward any race I want. Ill just start from this affirmation and then find things good enough to prove it to random people that will read the billionaire backed press that you praise

libertine 1y ago
I'm not sure what you're trying to imply. Didn't the Twitter algorithm change in July 2024 after Elon endorsed Trump, to increase his reach and the reach of other individuals?[0] > Every freaking machine learning model has a bias. You're saying this like there's no human decision behind it. As if it's an act of nature and "oh well that's how it turned out to be!", without any concern for legality, revenue, growth, user engagement, nothing matters, it's just "the algorithm doing its thing". Every social media algorithm is tailored, and people continually modify them. Heck, Google even named their algorithm updates for search! But let's entertain that idea of lack of agency - just because they don't have agency over the algorithm (which they do), they can still shut it down. If they can't control whether an algorithm promotes illegal stuff, or if it's being massively used by foreign agents' bot networks, then should they be running their own business? But hey, somehow they have it figured out for advertisers! lmao [0]https://www.theverge.com/2024/11/17/24298669/musk-trump-endorsement-x-boosting-republican-posts-july-algorithm-change https://www.theverge.com/2024/11/17/24298669/musk-trump-endo...
- retinaros 1y ago
  per your link. couldnt you entertain the possibility that those voices were silenced by left leaning twitter policies? they even admitted it. it appears now to this same leaning press that actually there are plenty of right wing voices in USA (like the ones that voted for trump). I am not sure what is the problem. just like and follow people of the left and the algorithm will adapt.

storus 1y ago

Why should the billionaires that set the current EU social networking policy be more important than the lone billionaire that runs X? Or do you think these policies are organic and come from the EU population itself?

libertine 1y ago
As I said: these decisions are made by elected officials. If there's a conspiracy of corruption/lobbying/interests behind those countries' decisions, it's a completely different problem that is for those countries' regulators to control, and/or for the people to choose to vote for someone else. France isn't Russia or Iran, where you have an illegitimate regime that does whatever it wants above their law and constitution. A Conspiracy Theory doesn't give any right to the billionaire owner of the social network to be above the law.
- storus 1y ago
  AFAIK X is owned by an American billionaire, not a Russian/Iranian one, so please don't pollute the argument with irrelevant strawmen. What we are seeing real-time is a failure/hack of representative democracy that serves only some extremely small, but well-connected minority at the levers of power that are willing to drive EU to the ground just to stay in power (see EU economic performance since 2008).
  - libertine 1y ago
    Well, you're taking what I said out of context, because it was YOU who brought the conspiracy theory stating that France/EU illegitimately serves the interests of billionaires, whereas I compared it to countries such as Russia/Iran. So don't try to spin your irrelevant bad takes on me, own up to them. > What we are seeing... What you're seeing is that a billionaire is being held accountable, and for some unknown reason, you don't like it. You don't represent the opinion of anyone but yourself.
    - storus 1y ago